Did the James Webb Space Telescope Change Astrophysics? | 2024 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 мар 2024
- How did the earliest galaxies form, and what implications does that have for fundamental laws of physics? Join Neil deGrasse Tyson, the Frederick P. Rose Director of the Hayden Planetarium, and a panel of leading scientists and experts for a spirited conversation around the profound impact NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope is having on our understanding of the universe since it began transmitting images and astronomical data in 2022.
#JWST #EarlyUniverse #BigBang #Astrophysics
This year’s panelists include Mike Boylan-Kolchin of University of Texas at Austin, Wendy Freedman of the University of Chicago, Priya Natarajan of Yale University, Rachel Somerville of the Flatiron Institute, and John Wise of Georgia Institute of Technology. Delving into the cosmic mysteries unraveled by the JWST, the discussion will explore the telescope’s recent revelations, including bright and enigmatic galaxies that emerge in the extremely early universe-challenging conventional cosmological understandings of how galaxies formed.
The late Dr. Isaac Asimov, one of the most prolific and influential authors of our time, was a dear friend and supporter of the American Museum of Natural History. In his memory, the Hayden Planetarium is honored to host the annual Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate-generously endowed by relatives, friends, and admirers of Isaac Asimov and his work-bringing the finest minds in the world to the Museum each year to debate pressing questions on the frontier of scientific discovery. Proceeds from ticket sales of the Isaac Asimov Memorial Debates benefit the scientific and educational programs of the Hayden Planetarium. 
Наука
Watch more Isaac Asimov Memorial Debates from years past in our playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLrfcruGtplwGKzxDI_Ne06NlpOKt-yonZ
I have found it very hard to listen to NDT ever since he threw science under the bus and started to push the idea there are more than 2 genders. The man betrayed reality, logic and reason to keep his job and will be remember as such. He has given in to the modern bonfire of the vanities and the 100,000 social media Savonarola's causing it daily.
Someone else needs to host these things: Neil just keeps interrupting people
I think the Big Bang, which remains a theory, never happened. What we call the universe has always existed and that's the only thing we can say is eternal and Infinite. Galaxies are destroyed from time to time and are reborn again, just as Andromeda and our Milky Way will one day emerge. Two galaxies will destroy each other and a new one will emerge. What we probably see as expansion do to our limites is perhaps like currents in a huge ocean moving in different directions.
@@livinginthisgalaxy7961 I'm trying to convince myself that he warned them all ahead of time that it would happen and to be prepared for it and that it would be necessary for keeping things on track and moving along. My definite sense is that these folks are *so* smart that they wouldn't even need to be warned about it.
@@livinginthisgalaxy7961rrrrrrrr
I wanted to thank Neil for inviting me and all the panelists and for his team for organizing this flawless event! I had a blast chatting with Neil and the other panelists on and off the stage about our latest work on the first generations of galaxies and their supermassive black holes.
Thanks for allowing the rest of us to listen in.
Thankyou for the knowledge 🙏
Thank you for joining the panel! A fantastic discussion.
You are so lucky to be up there with Neil
A panel discussion as thrilling as one of Isaac Asimov's sci-fi novels.
Neil’s super power is the ability to hold the entire scope of the esoteric conversation conducted by five other experts in his mind so that ideas are flowing in a clear direction. All this while ensuring that non experts in the audience can follow, and digest, the conversation. What a hero Neil DeGrasse Tyson is!
I've been saying this for years, ESPECIALLY about the Isaac Asimov Memorial Debates. A lot of people think that just because Neil hasn't published in years, that he's "just" a science popularizer and not much more knowledgeable than your typical science enthusiast in college or high school. Little do they consider that perhaps they think this way precisely because Neil breaks things down so well, he gives the illusion that those things are easy to begin with.
Neil is TOO good at what he does. But it's events like these that showcase just how intelligent he is. Not only does he hold his own in a panel with five other experts, but he's able to "translate" their discussion into a language that the audience better understands. He can pinpoint exactly what things might get lost in translation, pause the conversation, and clarify them or elaborate.
This is the same guy who refused to do an interview with the press when word came out that gravitational waves had been detected, instead referring the media to the actual scientists who made that discovery. Later, during their presentation, those scientists thanked Neil for not talking about it.
So many people take him for granted, but Neil's level of awareness and ability to break things down are amazing. It's no wonder he's one of the most popular science communicators of our time.
You're led to believe it's a super power because he positions himself so well as a science educator and a sort of 'ambassador' to the audience that it makes you feel he's asking these questions from a non-understanding point of view. You can forget that he's a Harvard trained astrophysicist. I certainly praise Neil in this conversation, it was impressive. But he did interrupt a lot -- though in a comedic way usually.
@@3xxiled Has a teacher ever said to you, "if you have any questions, please ask. Chances are, other students have the same question." I feel like Neil is doing that here, answering a question a student might ask. You might be more knowledgeable or intelligent, so these interruptions could be excessive to you, but there might be others in the audience who could use these pauses. I count myself among them.
It reminds me of John Carpenter, the first constestant to win "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire." Rewatching his session, one might be surprised to find his questions rather easy. I attribute this to the internet age and our growing collective knowledge with time (he won that game 25 years ago). But as easy as they were, how many of us today can answer every single one of those question correctly, without using any lifelines, as he did? I think most of us would see at least one question there we couldn't answer, one subject we don't know. And yet, John Carpenter was able to answer all of them, without help and without a moment's hesitation. 25 years ago. Before the internet as we know it.
I bring that up as an example of how, no matter how knowledgeable we are, chances are, there's something we don't know. Most of us aren't John Carpenter, so we need an explanation on at least some of the questions he was given.
This should be the top comment. He brought me up to their level and summarized their statements all while keeping the conversation flowing equally between the panelists.
Actually, my guess is in the introduction half it's the other way around, he asks the questions he knows they will answer a certain way, so he can tell his story.
He already had his story before hand.
I went through a large number of comments and like others would like to thank NDT and certainly the panelists. But, I have to imagine he has scientific staff, event staff and museum staff that work on these events. My thanks to those who helped put together this wonderful panel and event.
😊 Thank you so much! We'll definitely pass this along to all the folks behind the scenes.
I've seen all the others since 2010 that are on RUclips. Thankyou for continuing this necessary tradition!
Same as. I wonder if complete recordings of the first ten exist.
They are on a playlist on this channel
@blogsfred3187 The first ten i.e. 2000 thru 2009. Are they on a playlist, as I had a look but couldn't see any from the 2000s?
@@christianbaughn199 no unfortunately
Thanks for helping an old college dropout understand the story behind the clickbait. And thanks for the easy conversion between redshift and matter density of the universe. That will surely get me out of trouble some day.
Amazing how on RUclips everything is now clickbait. Some videos I take note of and avoid in future because not only are they clicky but use terms such as 'shock'
@@pruephillip1338 I watched nothing but clickbait for 24 hours. You won't believe what happened.
Neil does an exceptional job of organizing this group as well as asking leading and probing questions to unpack what all these specialists in the cosmos know! Well done!
Just remember.... It's all fun and games until somebody, somewhere, divides by zero.
42🎉
@@jestermoonbut what is the question?😊
...lol
😂😂😂
We just need to divide by zero an infinite number of times.
If only politicians had even a fraction of the intelligence that these individuals possess.
First you have to decide what is more important Putin, Trump or JWST… 😢
Some politicians do.
Unfortunately intelligence is not a prerequisite for politicians that wish to climb the greasy pole.
To my surprise, i found this whole conversation extremely captivating, thanks to all who participated and all those who made it happen.
I have learned enormous amounts about our universe thanks to Dr. Tyson and this series. We need far more of this kind of programming on ordinary TV, because RUclips science shows, due to their depth and precision, attract mainly geeks and nerds. Like me. Actually, I'm pretty cool. It's just my wife, my friends, and all those around me who think I'm a nerd.
It is bad for you to worship this actor on TV.
@@adnanbosnian5051 Your envy is showing
@@barkingmad7407 Blind following is worshiping. Where is the evidence for the "science" he parrots about? Is he not about Truth? Why does he and all of them parrot propaganda from zion TV as if its true? Cant you see he is just an actor?
Amazing!! This needs to be at least 4 hours long though! Let the pros really talk and get into some niche questions.
Exactly, NDT is too much an attention seeker. Nothing wrong with it but we are not here for him. 😂.
Too painful to finish the full video with his perpetual interruptions.
Exactly @Kelberi sometimes I wish he would STFU and let the experts engage in conversation and enlighten us.
They would have been totally fine with minimal interruption/moderation
Just an incredibly, stunning panel conducted by Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson. Thank you panelists. Thank you American Museum of Natural History. Wow.
Thanks to YOU for watching! 🤩
How awesome is that. I was just wondering when the next Isaac Asimov debate would be coming. And here it is today. My favourite science debate/lecture thing.
Thank you so much for tuning in! 🥳
In a year?
they've cut out the Q&A portion at the end for the last several years of this debate.
It has taken me a couple of days to find the time to watch this in one go and WOW was it worth it! The future of science and cosmology is so bright. Thank you for bringing this to the world. Asimov would surely approve!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it!
Priya is so well spoken and gives fantastic insight and explanations...so intelligent
JWST was every astrophysicist's favorite Christmas present - *EVER!* The gift that keeps on giving and giving, and giving ...
This was one of the most relaxed, informative, and fun to watch panel discussion I have seen in a long time. Neil asked all the right questions and the panel provided lucid, to the point, knowledge driven answers. The subject matter was the biggest question science is working diligently on answering. What, why, when, and how.
Are you sure Neil was smart enough to have asked the right questions and are you sure you are smart enough to ask the right questions about who has the right questions!? Haha
Well, Neil managed to do it again. He literally danced around these entangled subjects again in his usual self-appreciating witful manner and arrived at no solid answers. Brian Greene or Michio Kaku may have been more efficient in moderating IMO but, I’m only smart enough to know that we have reached an almost impenetrable barrier being that how can we figuratively speaking, ever understand the universe’s; what came first the chicken or the egg, when all we have to go on is what light from 13.7 billion years ago is able to transmit to earth and tell us. Even in quantum mechanics and the limits there to understanding and testing string theory, we have reached perhaps the same insurmountable limitations. At least as long as there is funding for researchers I don’t think those jobs will disappear anytime soon.
I think what is needed is a fictional movie in the vein of like the Matrix to interject another red pilled fictional storyline about Cosmology and propose some new ways to think and new storyline contexts to visualize the themes of these theories, kind of like the Matrix or the Terminator or Orwell’s 1984 did for their genres. Then we might get more heads involved in solving these riddles bc we all know that two (or many) heads are better than a few. YOLO da’ challenges!
I’m not one to harp on the races and/or sexes, but I have to admit, it put a smile on my face seeing a black man and a woman discuss Astro physics. On another note, it was a good idea to have an actual physicist as the host. Neil did a great job!
Wow! Finally some well thought out and delivered estimations on JWST data. Thanks NdeGT for bringing such disciplined calm thinking to us. Great team. Great work.
Hello Neil and team.
Further to my previous comment, I would very much like to offer the following to the whole team. According to my hypothesis, which can unify the various fields of physics, explain Dark Matter: Dark Energy: Anitmatter, and two forces of gravity. Also, an alternatie explanation for the CMBR: Redshift: The atom: and a nonexpanding universe without any Big Bang or Cosmic Inflation, the following may be of interest.
The biggest question that needs to be asked in Cosmology is, Why is it that we can only see back to the CMBR at the same distance in every direction? This presents two problems. Firstly, in a universe that is said to have a begining in a Big Bang and Cosmic inflation within a billionth of a billionth of a second, dissipating the heat, radiation, and Matter throughout the universe, this would imply that there is a limit to how far this matter has spread.
If our Earth is situated anywhere other than the middle of this mass, we should see the CMBR at different distances in every direction. And Yes I have studied the ; Relativistic cosmological model, and what I say still stands.
And secondly, since the JWST is proving that there are fully mature galaxies so far back in time that they would have to have existed before the so-called Big Bang, It rules out that the CMBR is not what it is believed to be.
Since the only thing that supports the Big Bang is the CMBR, the only evidence for an expanding universe is Redshift and the only way that the Big Bang can be rationalized in a thermally equal universe is by the idea of Cosmic Inflation, which is a physical impossibility, Physicists are going round in circles trying to support the status quo.
I would propose that the standard model is flawed at the level of the atom.
There was no Big Bang and Cosmic iInflation.
The universe is not expanding, has always existed much as it is today and extends to infinity, therefore it has no begining and probably will never end.
There are two forces of Gravity, which I have a simple experiment that can prove this, and also proves the existence of Dark Energy / Dark matter.
Dark Matter is an incredibly small Negatively charged Monopole particle in a cloud that fills every available empty space throughout the universe.
Dark Energy, is the negative force of repulsion produced by the Dark Matter Particles trying to repel each other in every direction. It is also one of the two forces of gravity.
The CMBR is not due to the Big Bang, but is a point where electromagnetic radiation reaches saturation.
Redshift is not due to the expansion of the universe, but is due to electromagnetic radiation losing speed and energy over billions of years, If you consider over a period of around 14 Billion years, it would only have to lose 1 mile per second every 140,000 years to account for the redshift we see.
This and much more is explained in my Hypothesis, ( The Two Monopole Particle Universe ), details of which can be found by typing Tony Norman Marsh into Google
If you or any of your pannel are interested and can provide me with an email address, I am happy to send you a copy. Kind regards,
Tony Marsh
I simply love basking in discussions like this, where everyone is a top-level expert eager to explain what they're up to in actual research and learning from each other, and we get a break from all the bad news about what's become of the so-called "justice" system in the USA and the hideously insane wars that never seem to end all over the world.
Thank you, guys, for the break from the daily news!
One of the best panels Ive ever seen, next to Institute of Arts. I found this extremely motivating as a student studying computer science with the goal of programming simulations just like the ones talked about!
Neil De Grasse Tyson, you are brilliant at being an interpreter between these brilliant people and us lesser beings. You are the missing link! Thank you.
Absolutely.
This is what I needed, to understand what the JWST discoveries mean! There is so much noise about it everywhere, but this is the best by far! Thank you, Neil, and thank you, experts!
Debates are GREAT!
Good discussion, but I was blown away when Neil suggested merely 'questioning' the vaccine was anti-science? Some people are fascinating, and Neil is definitely among them.
The cumulative IQ on that stage is super-massive! Question to anybody reading this:
what was the early universe contained in? Wouldn't it have to be growing in some other space, like another universe? A bubble within a bubble and that bubble would have to be contained in another bubble? ....now my head hurts.
Excellent panel!
Excellent discussion!
Thank you so much!
Our pleasure! Thank you for watching!
Great conversation that can be followed by anyone with a basic understanding of astrophysics. Thanks
This discussion format would be PERFECT to wring out the "Climate Debate" and U.S. Foreign Policy. Keep up the good work.
This is so well done, for the broad masses to take interest in these great achievements of science, like the JWST. Of course Tyson is always entertaining, good panelists. This is great.
Usually not a NDT fan, but he was amazing at leading this discussion. ❤
Beautiful and thought provoking talk beyond anything. Culminating to the almost.last question whether we are able to imagine that.
I always remember Carl Sagan of the pale dot argument. Have to do so much to waste energy in fights.
Nature is so humbling. Thanks and congratulations to all.
There are lots of youtube video titles like "JWST has refuted the big bang!!!!"
If you'll notice, that's not what's going on in this
conference lol
those titles are clickbait, and many experts have tried to combat the clickbait.
I too can't wait to see what we discover out there while i'm still here to see it. With my own telescope and camera, and what the pros do.
It is all so wonderful to hear the passion for explanations to something that cannot be expained😊
This is the way to educate and ignite the spark in youngsters, and adults also. This is like a very good stand-up gig, a lecture and a rock-concert at the same time. Good job, brothers and sisters. Oh and true TV too. This is the way.
Wow! What a wonderful interaction. Neil is an absolute genius to not just know the underlying subject very well but to weave a story around it. Awesome!
Neil just can't not interrupt people when they're talking.
It's called ego.
I am so glad someone else said it. It was driving me mad during the whole video!
I think Neil keeps the conversation fun and light, and stops it getting too technical. His interuptions were mostly follow up questions for the benefit of the audience. I disagree with the ego comment below. By the way, you have to be confident in order to lead a discussion with five other great minds. It comes with the job he was given.
They kept ducking the questions. It was hard for them to just say “we were wrong.”
Look at bit about the dark ages and notice how many times that question is outright ducked. “Your model says there shouldn’t be any light in dark ages. JWST is seeing galaxies in this period. What does that say about your models?”
The easy answer was “they’re wrong somewhere.” And then explain.
They all tried to explain first and then admit they were wrong and Neil wasn’t letting them. He was also trying to keep the conversation streamlined and connect all the fields together to paint a clear picture for us the viewers. Given the complexity of the topics, that’s not an easy task.
Imagine him letting them go off on these rants and then trying to keep the topic alive. We would all be fairly lost after the first guest. Well, I surely would be lol
The part about ambulance chasing theorists was funny as hell.
Great now I noticed lol
That was a really pleasing discussion. I would have like to heard more about how we see the large and small scale models coming to agreement, particularly on the small scales, but this was really great!!! Thankyou!!
Now imagine being a 26 or 27 year old PhD student student in cosmology and are doing your defense. Neil is like one of you professors sitting on your defense committee who is asking you all these same questions he is asking these 5 distinguished scientists........as well as defending questions specific for your own research. And this can go on for several hours.
Neil is doing a great job presenting other possibilities and asking these 5 people to defend their results and asking them to delve into some of the details of the research.....just like some types of questions you get in a PhD defense. It's uncanny.
Nicely hosted by the Rev Tyson!
I am much more aware of the issue now and excited to see how the future of this research unfolds
Any time Neil has a podcast, presentation, or in any conversations, I make it a point to listen to it. It is always interesting, and I am always walking away with new knowledge. Although I wasn't in the building, Neil is probably talking about me about not knowing what the topics are but was happy to be attending.
NDT and the team did a phenomenal job. The amount of fields and cutting edge research they covered is crazy. I was surprised at how good each scientist was at explaining his research.
I wish it was longer and if they did a q&a.
But overall thanks to whoever organized it.
That moment when Neal enunciates "Gates law of computing" - no matter how fast a computer becomes, the current version of Windows at that time will take at least 60 seconds to post
What a stimulating discourse on the past, present and near-future of striving to prick this bubble of understanding that is our universe. Dr NDT has been an ever-accessible key to the rubik's cube of science and cosmology, that has allowed all us lesser minds the privileged to easily digest and let us wonder at the infinite beauty and complexity of it all. Like others, I have learned so much and continue to, thankfully, and today's incredible panel and insightful conducting by NDT has broadened that expansion even further. Heartfelt thanks to all who organise this event annually - it's value is beyond measure to all of us less science-educated seekers.🙏
This (The Isaac Asimov debate) is practically a holiday for us nerds.
I Think we already have our explanation to the big bang, since there were older galaxies and stars, maybe some died and that death was the birth of our galaxy. and it goes on and on like a cycle.
This is some of the best science advocacy I've witnessed. It's crucial for people to grasp the challenges science faces and the significance of funding scientific research.
Fantastic! Is there no q&a section? 🙂
Echoing what Neil said in closing, I'm really glad we have such incredible people doing the work in pushing our understanding of reality itself. Thank you!!!
lol
I will never forget finding the Isaac Asimov book back in the 70's or early 80's, changed my life and knowledge for ever
Neil and Coffee talk time ❤ ☕
Priya and Wendy where both amazingly informative during the talk. A talk panel with just the two of them and Neil would be interesting. Priya even brought up the LISA mission which is something I stumbled across the other day half-heartedly hopscotching through the web. And to watch Lisa's orbit with Earth is pretty cool... But wait at 1:00:17 Wendy says there are 3 giant new telescopes in the making, but only named one (the Giant Magellan Telescope.) What are the other 2? Unless one of the others would be the Vera Rubin.
Also I think anyone that fancies following science has read that article. So were there things older than 13.7 billion years discovered beyond the big bang? Is this the case, or not? If there are we're going to have to unhinge ourselves from the idea of being the first and only banging going on out there... its as simple as that.
What an amazing time we are living, where we can access this kind of content from our homes.
everyone is wrong.. what relative reference are they measuring the age from? stationary to what? slow galactic earth time? slower black hole time? or travelling at lightspeed? or universe expansion time? or space time furthest from any mass. The age is infinite, or instant -- relatively speaking!
This was a really fun conversation to listen to!
If you take all the ways we’re moving rotating, through the galaxy and through space, how does that affect the way we experience time?
How the JWST reveals the massive intergalactic twisted Birkeland currents (of plasma) as per the majestic Stephen's Quintet image, is indeed a marvel for the times. When studies into plasma mature, the JWST may well be seen as the founding / catalyst object for the wonders discovered by then and further on still yet to be discovered into the future.
I love we see tysons potential when surrounded by these brilliant and varied experts
Neil deGrasse Tyson is like the Carl Sagan of the 21st century. These topics are so hard to grasp, and yet he makes it at least somewhat comprehensible to the masses.
Is time different in the early universe? If so , how do we transpose it to our time?
Love these ❤ Neil does such a great job of making extremely complicated ideas accessible to someone with literally no science background.
Absolutely loved every minute of this mind blowing discussion !
Thank you, man... This debate is so fascinating... in Astrological scales, literally.
Wonderful!!! Thankyou all! XXX
Tyson did an outstanding job of interviewing and interpreting!!! Thank all of the panelists for sharing their expertise.
I have no relevant speciality or expertise in any of the areas of science discussed in this program. However, my thanks for the excellence of the five participants and of the chairperson
One area that did not come up in the discussion was what I understand to be the unresolved question of the absence of anti-matter both in the components of the various models and in the data being supplied from the JWT. Could it be that the missing element in the analysisof what occurred occurred in the very early period is whatever means that was ‘applied’ in order to remove that element from the highly complex processes that occurred in that early period. As I understand it the removal of that now missing element would result in considerable energy being released.
Wow, Niel is so good at raising the voice of the critiques and bridging them with the reality of how science work! Amazing debate!
I do love the way he makes the "experts" feel a little bit uncomfortable right off the bat.
Greetings to everyone! I will love to watch every second of this :D
Interesting panel.
It always surprises me that such wise scientists do not take into account possible alternative events based on the reality around us.
One of those events is that bodies with mass tend to rotate on themselves and around others.
Why not study the possibility that the universe is rotating as I mentioned previously. This would give us an older age of the universe depending on the angular velocity of the rotation. Light is curved in space-time, the curves are longer.
If one looks at other possibilities perhaps one would look for a Doppler effect at the current frequency known as “Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation”.
As I have mentioned before, if the universe rotates then there could be a massive black hole in its center. Furthermore this would give us an enormous amount of “dark” mass and “dark” rotation energy.
You see this in everything in science: things appear to go back further and be more complex than we thought.
as you isolate a infrared pulser in a nebula we can dev elop a depth perception in the infrared bandwidth i did it as a sample problem in school depth perception on linear infra ewd signal serious
i have a question. if one person observed the universe edge at 13.7b years, and another person observed the opposite edge at 13.8b, and a third person discovers stars older than the universe because of expansion (which may counter the 0.1b year gap), does that put our planet around the middle of the universe? if both opposite edges are practically the same distance?
I'm no physicist so this may be a stupid question, but we know that space is expanding and accelerating; we also know that time is affected by relative velocity, so is it possible that things like the speed of light could have been different in the early universe? Especially since Priya said that the dark matter clock might have been running at a different speed. Do we have any way to simulate the cosmic speed limit before first light?
It's the expansion of the universe which is accelerating. Galaxies, etc, are moving with space, not accelerating within it (except when being drawn towards other objects due to the gravity generated by their mass). There's no reason to think that the speed of light was different, and in fact it would cause more problems than it solved (which is why that paper they discussed for several minutes, regarding the quality of the peer review, has generally not been well received).
I don't know what Priya meant about the dark matter clock, but since we don't know what dark matter is (only what it is not) then -- and this is off the top of my head -- I don't think we can be certain how stable it is or how it might have behaved in the temperature regime of the early universe (ie. how was it produced, and is it still being produced but at a slower rate by the same or another process, or does it now exist in an equilibrium of processes).
@@RichWoods23Thanks very much for that explanation. It's clearly all way over my head. It just seemed to me that if space/time inflation itself is accelerating I don't understand how a measure of distance/time like km/sec isn't affected. It's very confusing to me. Since they said the universe was much denser around first light, and presumably during the dark ages, one would think that the closer you get to the big bang, the weirdness might have an impact on those fundamental knobs, perhaps leading to that discrepancy between the local and distant comparisons they spoke about. Just me thinking out loud and clearly not grasping much of this. Thanks again.
@@DarthVader-km6ku Damn YT keeps deleting my replies. I think it's because I included a URL, so we'll see if this attempt goes better...
Many things in cosmology can be a bit hard to get your head around, but it's worth sticking with it for that moment when everything clicks, and of course the knowledge will likely last you a lifetime. I'm going to tell you how to find an online course, for which you don't have to sign up, and can safely skip the login parts and the maths, if that's not your thing. There are just seven web pages, which will probably only take 20 minutes to read (the eighth page is just a course feedback form).
Search for "expansion of the universe, introduction" and look for the Physics LibreText link that's titled "13.0: The Expansion of the Universe Introduction".
The speed of light is the same for all observers.
@@kundakapsisent the speed of light different in a black hole. Since the gravity is strong enough to capture light? Wouldnt that slow down the lights travel time?
Could time have behaved differently in the early development of the universe. If so, how can we calculate its age?
Time is something we perceive. It's possible the universe is older than we can comprehend.
This outstanding debate was wonderfully and intellectually accessible and understandable to someone like me with only marginal knowledge but wanting to gain understanding. Thank you.
unreal conversation. just wow. ❤
And, if I am not wrong, none of his sci-fi books was evere reviewed by the NYT. He was a genius. My favorite short story by him is
"The Last Question."
i can watch and listen all the time, with pleasure, great minds like these
Thank you Neil for sharing your love and brilliance with us. You are such a treasure. We love you just the way you are. Do not change a thing thanks.
I wanted to know if saving Chandra is now necessary. Is the desire to build a new x-ray telescope or fix Chandra?
Good conversation, though it would have been better if Neil didn't interrupt so much
To all of you, human genius scientist and physicist ❤ thank you for all of the knowledge you are sharing with me🥰
Best Cleaning Lady
Berlin, Germany
When you talk about 'degenerate' parameters? does that basically mean when you get the same result from unrelated/alternate parameters? Is that considered 'bad' for the developing theory?
So the implication our model is (could be) flawed but seems correct as it gives the correct answer (as in observation)
But if we can get a really accurate correlated model, if it uses 'degenerate' parameters and methods but gives the correct results then surely it could at least posit the 'correct' theory? at least it seems to me that as long as you are aware your model is an 'emulation' instead of a 'simulation' then surely it becomes an invaluable tool to search for the 'simulation' level theory.
[edit] Also great discussion really fascinating, thanks x
Hey @SE Montreal, did you get past the title? Lots of good info here, if you listen and understand. SE thinks the JWST has broken the entire model.
So the problem is that materia we now not build black holes that. Can it be that initially there was materia that is “good” for it? And all it collapsed so we can’t find it anymore?
We need to build two more James Webb Space telescopes
There bigger mirrored scopes in the works.
I’m very interested to see what, at the very end, Wendy Freedman is hinting at. I also appreciate the blinded man control when exploring the elephant.
I like and respect Neil, but I just wish he'd learn to let his guests speak.
EXACTLY RIGHT! He is too full of himself!
I totally agree
Is it impossible for one person to know everything at one moment in time as change is constant so everything is unknowable, knowledge reaches paradox.✌️❤️🇬🇧
Wow, Asimov would be impressed! This conversation was amazing.
Neil. I listen with the discussions about JWST explore back in time to the moment this Universe began.
Okay, great. Wonderful... But I guess I have to die before I get the knowledge I seek .. What existed before our universe. Show how, I know that the time before our time began, did and does exist... That is the knowledge that I really want. Maybe, it is in that pre-time ... that the little(big) green men exist. The time for time.
Please take a stab at this general question.
Thanks .. Scott Davidson
so for this 3rd hidden thing creating a gap in what we know, I suggest Dark Time, we may not know how time worked in the very early universe and it may have warped as we entered inflation causing these incongruities were some models say 13.7 and others say 13.8 and if Time is relative and Time is Space if Space was compacted why do we not expect Time to be compacted?
This was one fantastic show. Thanks for the video.
Glad you enjoyed it!
As our eyesight improves with time, our imaginations ought to as well. Here's hoping...
Fantastic all around! Bravo Neil de Grasse on a splendid facilitation!
I know the "Tired Light Theory" has been supposedly mathematically discredited but I am one who can't let it go. Otherwise I agree with the other commenters that praised Neil for his uncanny ability to harness a complicated subject discussed by experts of different fields and bring it all to the masses in a clear way. I also agree with the comments regarding more time needed for the panel to expand more in depth a discussion of their respective fields.